Jersey Unreported Judgments

Criminal Hearing - application to be removed from the notification requirements under the Sex Offenders Law

[2020]JRC219

Royal Court

(Samedi)

19 October 2020

J

-v-

The Attorney General

IN THE MATTER OF J

AND IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION UNDER ARTICLE 5(5) OF THE SEX OFFENDERS (JERSEY) LAW 2010

R. C. P. Pedley Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate J. W. R. Bell for the Representor.

JUDGMENT

THE COMMISSIONER:

1.        Applying the principles helpfully set out in the case of A v AG [2020] JRC 004 we have agreed to hear this application for the notification requirements to be lifted, in private.

2.        The applicant was convicted for the possession of indecent images of children and the Court ordered that 5 years should elapse before the applicant could apply to have the notification requirements lifted.  Restraining orders were imposed for the same period.  The applicant has served the sentence imposed and has been eligible to have the requirements lifted for over 3 years now. 

3.        The application is not opposed by the Attorney General and Crown Advocate Pedley has referred to the frankness of the admissions the applicant made when the police first searched the applicant's home, which Crown Advocate Pedley said were characteristic of his dealings with the police and other agencies. 

4.        The police report and the de-notification report both assess the applicant as being at a low risk of sexual reconviction and the applicant scored in the low range on the assessment tools.  There have been some issues since the applicant's release which have been addressed appropriately but we note in particular two things:

(i)        The applicant's response to supervision after arrest has been described as very positive.  The applicant has been open about the applicant's sexual interests, difficulties and offending and has worked through the Sex Offender Treatment Program under the guidance of Dr Briggs.

(ii)       The progress made by the applicant on problem solving was apparent from the applicant's recent job loss after someone contacted the applicant's employer informing them of the conviction.  The applicant did not allow this to derail the applicant's emotional stability and realistic and achievable plans for the future.

5.        We are therefore persuaded on the balance of probabilities that the risk to the public or to particular individuals does not justify the applicant remaining subject to the notification requirements and the application is therefore granted. 

Authorities

A v AG [2020] JRC 004